This isn't really new news, nor does it seem very final. They were clear before their last tour that that would be their last ever full-scale tour, but they also said they'd be open to doing the occasional one-off show, and I think that's still in the cards. Until I hear it from Neil Peart, who's the only member who's physically not really able to keep up with Rush, then I'll hold out hope that they're not 100% broken up.

It does sort of surprise me and disappoint me that they don't have one more album in them, since Clockwork Angels was so goddamn good. But there's nothing at all wrong with going out on a high note, and my guess is that they don't want to put out an album if they're not willing to back it up with a few big tours.

If this really is the very end of Rush, then that's one of my all-time favourite bands throwing in the towel. Grateful as hell I got to see them a few times.

Seconding this, hard. They put on such a great show. I was extremely happy I got to see them do 2112 (albeit abbreviated) live. How can anyone begrudge them if they decide to hang it up, though? They've been going for nearly fifty years.

And someone already updated their page to show split up? Seems a tad premature.

Agree with the general sentiments here. Rush was my #1 favorate band for a while (no joke) when I was around 12 or 13, and even as my music tastes got "harder/faster" so to speak, I always had a soft spot for them.

I was a fan of pretty much everything they did up through "Signals," and kind of lost interest in them after "Grace under Pressure" and the mid-80s stuff, but some of their more recent work is almost as good as their "Classic" period stuff.

They had a heck of a run, put out some utterly timeless and outstanding stuff over their long career, and their retirement has been well-earned. And its good to be going out on a high note; as opposed to slowly fading away after a long steady sinking deeper into mediocrity (like a certain recently-disbanded thrash band I can think of.) I wish I had had a chance to see Rush perform- even in their later years. Never did.

That noted, I didn't even realize they were still together. Rush is one of those bands I've never held a firm opinion on. But also a band I've been meaning to add to my library. Kudos on their longevity, though.

The band basically called it quits after the last tour already, so the news doesn't exactly come as a surprise. I attended a first show on their last tour and now know it was the right decision to go there. It's the right decision for the band to call it quits, since the band offered us long years of great music and left on an absolutely high note with Clockwork Angels, probably my favorite record of theirs.

I think Rush is phenomenal but they are not, never were, and now never will be a metal band by any measurable metric.

I am an admitted late bloomer with this band. When I was much younger, and I'm talking close to 25 years ago by this point, I knew and enjoyed the hits but saw them as a "lighter Dream Theater"

It wasn't until 2010 or so, that I just exploded with interest in their full studio album catalog, as this was spurred by finding an OG vinyl press of Moving Pictures for $1 at a Goodwill shop. My eureka, "what have I been missing" moment.

I think because that was the first album I heard from them, that I view the stretch from Permanent Waves through Power Windows to be their most superior era. I became accustomed to the synth heavy sound right from the get go, so I didn't have that experience of hearing synth heavy albums after a stretch of guitar based albums and finding that jarring (although if I was a follower from the beginning, why would I find it jarring-the synths were gradually introduced album to album from basically 2112 onward). This is probably why I recognize the 70s albums as very good, but have not connected with them as "masterworks". The 70s albums are actually my least favorite era-I also prefer the 90s and beyond albums over the 70s stuff.

I did get to see them one time, on the R40 tour in 2015. It was made well known in advance that this would be their last tour, and it was a "now or never" moment for me. Incredible show, despite them being years removed from their prime physical form (IMO, they never left their prime artistic form, save for an occasional misstep album here or there), and I am glad I went.

Peart definitely earned his retirement, and I suppose you have to respect the other two for not trying to replace him. There were rumors of a Lee/Lifeson project in the works, and if they are going forth with that, they should get the biggest Peart worshiper in Mike Portnoy to man the drums.

If Rush can be accepted into the Archives on the basis of 2112 and their wider influence on various metal bands then Zeppelin should also be accepted.

Not surprised the band are calling it a day, as they've been in semi-retirement for a while now. I never saw them live - there was an opportunity to see them on their last UK tour a few years ago, but the tickets were £69 and I thought that was just too steep, although I think they were touring with an orchestra at the time and playing the whole of Clockwork Angels live with them, which would explain it. However, after looking at the setlist, I was glad I didn't go as they played about 4 songs from their best period (76-81), the whole of CA and then an hour or so of their 80s keyboard stuff. I would have been severely annoyed if I'd gone to that.

Some people online seem to worship Rush's 80s keyboard albums, and I just don't get it at all - everything they made from 84-87 particularly sounds very dated, very cheesy and the songwriting is abysmal, it approaches 80s Genesis in places. The band seemed to completely lose their identity in that decade.

Yeah, after "Signals," that's about where I gave up on them. "Signals" was their last really good album for me up until about the mid-90s, and even then I always prefer the 70's/early 80's stuff. "Grace Under Pressure," "Power Windows," and "Presto" and I think there was one other one in there, all of them just sounded like watered down new-agey 80's pop - utterly flat and boring to me.

It's like what happened when Yes reformed in 1982 with that Rabin guy to play generic pop music. Sure their earlier stuff wasn't exactly hard rocking material but it was interesting and (in my opinion) very good.

Some people online seem to worship Rush's 80s keyboard albums, and I just don't get it at all - everything they made from 84-87 particularly sounds very dated, very cheesy and the songwriting is abysmal, it approaches 80s Genesis in places. The band seemed to completely lose their identity in that decade.

Rush wasn't the only one who gave in to the 80's, remember Pink Floyd's A Momentary Lapse of Reason?

However, I may go out on a limb here, but I like the 80's output of both bands. Sure, it's different from their older material which gave them their respective legendary status among the prog rock bands, but it was nice to see how far their creative juices could flow. It may also sound dated to some folks (especially because of those synths and drums that echo big time), but I don't mind that, it relaxes me. I find it great when bands succeed in making hard rocking material, as well as in creating more laid-back material.

80's Rush had some great songs and I think Grace Under Pressure is one of their best records. I did prefer the 70's but Rush were great musicians and could do great work with whatever style they decided to write music in.

"2112" might not have been "The number one most metal album of the entire decade" but it was certainly right up there with the best of them. Yeah sure there might have been bands/albums that were heavier, but by the standards of that time, it was still pretty heavy. That's all I was saying. (sheesh.)